Close Menu
    Politik

    Realitätscheck: Wie Carneys Rede in Davos drei Monate später Bestand hat

    Share.
    View 5 Comments

    5 Kommentare

    1. wpgrt on

      It’s too bad. He is clearly the most qualified PM we have had in a long time. But JT left him with a real shit hand. Most of Carney’s time to date has been wasted undoing the ‚work‘ of JT.

    2. MightyHydrar on

      It was a very good speech. 

      It was not a speech about how Canada was going to make „Death to America“ the new national motto, and neither was it a speech about blind idealism. The key part was „we take the world as it is, not as we wish it to be“

      The article is less of an analysis, and more of a repeat of Lloyd Axworthys ongoing hissy fit about Carney actually trying to live in the real world. 

    3. amazingmrbrock on

      >Huebert found irony in Carney’s choice of a line from Thucydides’s Melian Dialogue to begin his Davos speech: „The strong can do what they can, and the weak must suffer what they must.“

      >It’s a story about a weak power, the neutral island of Melos, that faced an ultimatum to join with its powerful neighbour Athens in a war against its old ally Sparta. The Melians refused, citing their honour and their bonds of obligation to Sparta.

      >The result, said Huebert, was „the Athenians then do exactly as they had threatened: They attack Melos, destroy it, kill all the men and enslave all the women and children.“

      >“So the real meaning of the Melian Dialogue,“ said Huebert, „is that you can have all the principles in the world, but if you’ve got a great power beside you, you’ve got to put the people’s safety first. It’s not about having principles. In fact, it’s surrendering your principles so you can survive.“

      Was it ironic or knowingly accurate. When the options are principles or death and the scope is national things get uncomfortable. I guess I can just understand being a bit flip floppy on a lot of morally obvious issues when the moral villain is nearby and volatile. Self preservation demands it

    4. YaumeLepire on

      It was a good speech, but I have to say that I haven’t found much to like at all in his administration’s actual actions, whether at home or abroad. Answering the attack on Iran how he did was a demonstration of how the Davos speech was just wind. Pretty words, but just wind nonetheless.

    5. Chrristoaivalis on

      The key takeaway: Carney said only UN Charter-backed force was valid, and then supported the Iran war.

      In a statement that sent a rumble of discontent through his party, he made no mention of the UN Charter he had described as a bedrock of principle Canada would defend in a landmark speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, the previous month. Instead, Carney appeared to give Canada’s blessing: „Canada supports the United States acting to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon and to prevent its regime from further threatening international peace and security.“

    Leave A Reply